Jesus was a nihilist

Nihilism, from what I understand, means to drop all values and beliefs in order to reconstruct yourself with what ideas that best fits you. Isn't that a very Christian thing to do? Isn't the essence of the Christian faith to be able to leave all beliefs behind and simply trust yourself, the others and 'the' big Other (or otherness, I mean, the unknown). Jesus reformed the Jewish beliefs in a way that is not that far from Nietzschean nihilism. Remember, Christianity was only a Jewish sect when it began. Its intention was not to directly CONVERT as much people as possible in order to LEAD them. It is $aint-Paul, the Roman Rabbi, who had a wonderful revelation; "Christ could be commercial".

I personally see Jesus Christ as a nihilist figure for the way he behaved. On the other hand I do not see God or the Church as relevant. What do you think?

It's quite obvious that Jesus Christ would have been a metalhead if he was born in our times. Who knows? Perhaps His Second Coming is already preparing to revive the black metal scene? Or maybe he settled for setting up DateJesus.com and has decided to invest his energies into coasting through the Kali Yuga. The task of reversing the poles and bringing about the return of the Satya Yuga belongs to the Anti-Christ, anyway.

Nihilism, from what I understand, means to drop all values and beliefs in order to reconstruct yourself with what ideas that best fits you. Isn't that a very Christian thing to do? Isn't the essence of the Christian faith to be able to leave all beliefs behind and simply trust yourself, the others and 'the' big Other...

Actually, that sounds more like the opposite of Christianity, at least in its dogmatic aspect. Jesus may have dissented from the Jews, but I wouldn't necessarily call him a nihilist because of that. The religion as practiced, however, is far from the definition you give.

Also, the definition you give is different from Nietzsche's idea of nihilism. By your definition, Nietzsche would be a nihilist, but he himself thought of nihilism more as a rejection of life, something that must be overcome to become an Ubermensch. Thus, to him, Christianity actually was very nihilistic. You have to distinguish these two different conceptions of nihilism.

It's important to remember Jesus probably didn't even exist, as independent non church sources have very little record of anything or anyone like that around the years he supposedly lived, and even if he did exist everything we know about him is based on church gospels whose final versions were written many years later. So commenting on his core philosophy is a grand waste of time, like commenting on the philosophy of a sitcom character or Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. The Jesus we know is a fictionalization, and thus his philosophy is all marketing.

Why is it that everyone here is still operating under the assumption Jesus was a real person or the events in the Bible are true in any way shape or form? "Jesus" is a product of the church, designed to be an easy sell. Nothing more. Looks like even here they found plenty of buyers.

to Nu Metal Hair MetalWhether or not he was a real person is irrelevant in this conversation. Whether it's a debate about a fictional character or an actual person doesn't change the outcome in this particular scenario, does it?

The existence of Jesus is a topic that few of us here would have the time and dedication to pursue.

If he was real, he was just as much a posterchild as if he were made up, right?

Speculating on such a person's philosophy on life isn't such a waste of time you make it out to be, because of the impact the philosophy has had on our world.

On the actual topic, I think calling Jesus a nihilist is like calling the Sex Pistols nihilistic. Wasn't that the whole point for Jesus to be a "nihilistic rebel" that stood up for the oppressed then try to make everybody feel bad by committing suicide?

Jesus marketed himself as a nihilist of sorts to the Jews and they ate it right out of his hands, but just as in the case of the Sex Pistols (for lack of a better example), it was just a sales pitch for a greater agenda.

Why is it that everyone here is still operating under the assumption Jesus was a real person or the events in the Bible are true in any way shape or form? "Jesus" is a product of the church, designed to be an easy sell. Nothing more. Looks like even here they found plenty of buyers.

Hmm, perhaps I should have just said debating weather the Church was preaching nihilistic metaphors was idiotic and made it easier for you fruitcakes to understand. The Jesus myth isn't nihilistic anymore than Slipknot is nihilistic or anything else you could stretch some loose definition of nihilism to fit. Well shit, in that case liberalism is nihilistic because it drops traditional conservative Christian values for some other stupid value system. Fuck you.

Besides, half the posts weren't talking about what the impact on society was, they were refering to him as a historical figure under the assumption the Biblical tales are true, assuming he wanted to be a Jewish Socrates and other moronic ideas. As I said, fuck you.

He also was an activist against the greatest empire history has ever seen.

I would hardly call the Rome the greatest nation to ever exist. Evola states that all the essential parts of roman culture can be found in simpler forms by the Germanic and Gallic peoples and that Roman and Byzantine destruction was due to their decadent and vile nature.

Sense: power is inevitable, so like all things, it becomes a question of quality.

Duhhhhhrrrrrrrrrrrrr....

Jesus didn't deny power but by showing the real power as an exclusive attribute of God he unveiled a model of society where humans would necessarily behave better towards each other, and where they would come closer to what they would really be without the corruption that arises from the presence of a lot of power between humans. There is much more room and power left to God in the Christian religion than in the Pagan ones, if you think of it. Not only because of the centralisation of power in the hands of an only God, but also and more importantly because of the nature of the relationship established between the believer and God in the Christian religion. While Pagans struggle with and against the Gods in battles (see the Iliad), defy them very often, and manage to trick them before their actions are seen (for example this Greek who managed to make the Gods of the Olympus eat some of his own son for dinner before they realize it), these things are not possible with God in the Christian religion. He's omnipotent, cannot by defeated by other Gods since there are none, and cannot be tricked as he sees everything. That leaves little or no room for humans to try to use their power in ways that would not accord themselves to the Will of the Whole. In theory that would make a much saner society. People would always act according to the absolute and the whole, they would never destroy nature or trick people or use power for their invidual needs at the expense of the collective goals or of the health of all. The only reason why this fails in practice is because most people don't really believe in God. "Christians" today are for the most part atheists and we'd all be better off if they all really believed in God.